And so on the Senate floor, Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proved it by offering to give Democrats a chance to vote on Obama’s joke of a proposal:

Reid called McConnell’s offer a Republican “stunt,”but how is bringing Obama’s supposedly serious proposal to the floor a “stunt”? Is not the proposal itself, with it’s tax hikes, increased spending, and elimination of the debt ceiling a stunt, and a really bad joke?(although McConnell did laugh at it.) Isn’t Reid really objecting to the exposure of the President’s bad joke and bad faith to the public, (even though the MSM will do its best to bury the news of it?)

Think about that. The President of the United States, a Democrat, crafted a fiscal cliff package that would give him everything he wants. It has tax hikes on the rich. It has huge tax hikes on investments and estates. It has more stimulus spending. It has no meaningful, specific, or guaranteed spending cuts. And it compels Congress to cede control of the debt ceiling to him. This is “fairness” on steroids. The Senate’s top Republican proposed an up-or-down vote on everything the president wants, yet Democrats, who control the upper chamber, instantly blocked it. By what definition is it a “stunt” to hold a vote on the president’s full, public plan? The White House has insisted it’s a serious document, yet Hill Democrats don’t want it to see the light of day.

Gee, is it possible these morons want to go over the fiscal cliff so they can get everything they want (higher taxes on everyone, gut the military) and blame it on the Republicans? Is it possible that virtually everything these pathetic, perennially projecting reprobates do is a politically calculated “stunt”?

Don’t worry, Reid’s discomfort was only temporary. He’ll be back tomorrow to talk about how serious the President’s plan is, and how the Republicans are just playing games and holding the middle class hostage – more dangerous than al Qaeda, they are..

First, why was anyone surprised that Obama’s initial offer to the Republicans was a compendium of what he’d actually prefer? We became so accustomed to Obama’s earlier habit of making pre-emptive concessions that the very idea he’d negotiate in a perfectly normal way amazed much of Washington. Rule No. 1 is that you shouldn’t start bargaining by giving stuff away when the other side has not even made concrete demands.

Why is it that a “compendium of what Obama prefers” is being blocked by the Democrat Senate Leader?